So, you're saying some Orthodox literally say: "We don't consider them Ecumenical. It doesn't matter what YOU consider Ecumenical"
?A heretic rejected an Ecumenical Council?
You can keep being a disingenuous faggot all you want. It only hurts your cause not mine.
Surely you know that Nicaea was followed by a period in which the heretical position was more popular than the position agreed on at the Council? It certainly didn't have widespread support in the aftermath, despite the decisions made there being correct.
Was the heretical position more popular in the West or in the East?
'And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”'
Alright, sure. Peter had a role in leading the early Church. The "bind/loose" thing is also commissioned to the rest of the disciples in Matthew 18:18. I'll be honest and say that I don't know what those keys are exactly for. But what I do know is that the Bible doesn't talk about those keys being passed down to anybody else.
This was covered a few pages back, but it doesn't hurt to repeat it.
He is the rock of the church, but it's not entirely clear that this passage is as simple as that.
A distinction without much importance given the state of the church at the time. Nicaea was an almost entirely eastern council because the church was largely based in the east, because the empire was largely eastern. The biggest proponents and opponents of Arianism were largely eastern. None of this is relevant to the point he was making - large meetings that don't have some serious disagreement from someone, somewhere probably aren't saying anything of import. That's true of life in general.
1. Jesus uses a different word - a feminine one at that - for 'this rock' than he does for Peter
Isn't this only an issue on the Greek translation, and the word in Aramaic "Cephas" more likely to be what was said?
In 1 Corinthians 15:5 Paul refers to Peter as Cephas.
This does not in any way respond to what I said. He uses petra for 'this rock' and petros for 'Peter' in Matthew 16:18. That he would have said Cephas in Aramaic is not in question. God's Word is what it is, the NT is written in Koine Greek and the divinely-inspired writer has chosen to use different words for 'Peter' and 'this rock' in the verse in question.
Sorry but I am having a very hard time taking this level of straw grasping seriously.
You think a literate tax collector for the Roman Empire would not know how to write in the most basic form of ancient Greek? It is well established that all the books of the NT were written in Greek.
False. The "originally written in Greek" argument started in the 16th century. If we look at contemporary writings from the early days of the Church they do not support those claims at all.
People can't even agree as to whether Papias meant Aramaic or Hebrew (not there was a huge written difference between the two). In either case, it was taken up by the later father under the assumption that Matthew, as the most 'Jewish' of the gospels, would not have been written in Greek. But the statement given by Eusebius is not as clear as you (and many who take up the argument) wish it to be. Not only is it ambiguous as to which language is being referred to, what you have given as 'language' could equally mean 'manner', 'compiled' can also mean 'arranged' and in either case that could mean a whole range of things, and 'translated' could also be 'interpreted'. With such a small fragment, quoted centuries later, there is a paucity of context with which to understand what is actually being said.
Thank you.
Because, that's how Greek, or any gendered language works, especially with declensions. Petros = masculine, petra = feminine. The author couldn't call St Peter a feminine name, nor could he call a rock a masculine noun. Don't bring up a language you don't understand to make a point you don't understand.
